Yes. I've been using it for 4 years now. Especially when it updated to version 4 ESET changed to the core. It used to be just the eye thingy, now it has a Personal Firewall, Network Protection, Parental Control, Gamer Mode for Full-Screen applications. Frankly, everything you'll ever need. You can also manually block websites (livejasmin.com like everyone knows, or popup ad sites). You can also create a System Rescue CD for a possibility of a failure of software or hardware. It's great with spyware too, however you can combine it with monthly scans with Spybot S&D and you'll be safe more than ever.

Seconding this. I've had Security Essentials, Avast, Threatfire. None even detected traces of the new Sirefef rootkit (then again, Combofix didn't pick it up either). I found out I had it from the ESET site.

Yeah haha, I found out I had it through investigative work / that nerd instinct that tells you that maybe 5-10% of your processing power seems affected. I'm shocked Combofix didn't pick it up. I googled the symptoms that's how I found it, and the ESET removal tools did a great job. Definitely a convert to their tools.

ESET is perfect for PC's with medium capability (Celeron and higher). MSE would be great with slower computers. If you really want tight security ALL the time, Kaspersky is the way to go. However, licences are expensive to buy, hard to find them online that last longer than a week and takes up many of the system resources.

My memory is foggy but before there was MSE, I believe there was another free AV available from Microsoft that was an acquisition (we're talkin' like Windows XP days here I think). I was thinking that team produced MSE but I seem to be mistaken.

While I've never used it personally, I used to work at a retail store's tech bench and saw too many computers come in infected with virus's and have AVG installed. Also, I've always questioned how good "free" programs are in general (granted, there are definitely some good ones out there). Personally I switched to Webroots Antivirus and have been virus free for years (and I get into some sh!t too, pirating and so forth). Side note: Some free programs I'm a fan of are CCleaner, Defraggler, VLC, TreeSize, Universal Extractor and PowerTools Lite.

I can confirm that it is. I fix computers for the general pop up clicking public and while any idiot can get a virus the difference between AVG and Trend Micro, Norton, or even MSE is usually the difference between two infections and two-hundred infections. I strongly recommend MSE, it's excellent especially for free AV, I've been using it for quite a while and haven't had a single issue.

I've seen multiple PC's infected running MSE like nothing was going on. Ditto with ESET which is what I use everywhere at work. Recently while uploading new/0day viruses to virustotal.com, i've noticed that kaspersky and drweb actually seem to get 80% of the ones that MSE/ESET don't get. The programs are pretty crap and slow down your computer but they seem to catch all the new stuff that's getting through flash/java exploits every day. Always need multiple cleanup tools if you're not going to re-image too, can't rely on just one. Most of the time if your virus scanner detects something on your hard drive that you didn't just download or attempt to go to a site it was already there and running for a few days. Which is no bueno. Probably already stole your passwords days ago too.

There is something to be said for arrogance when someone not living the way you want them to live is defined as a waste of time, liberty and life.

And again, I don't see how it's a loss of property. I've never been religious, and my family is atheist as well, so unless I'm missing something besides cult-like fringe groups, I'm not familiar with it being common practise that churches take your property.

They don't take it, they brainwash you so you give them stuff. Mostly cash, but I know at least one person who sold a car so he could donate money to the church.

It's not a question of them living their lives the way I think it's best. It's about freedom. I couldn't care less about what people do with their time, properties, liberty or lives. But one shouldn't be allowed to trick that many people into giving up their stuff.

The same logic applies to scammers: they might convince naive people to give them money, but that doesn't mean they aren't criminals just because they didn't put a gun into their heads.

Those guys piss me off a whole lot. Aside from claiming to literally be the Son of God, Jesus was a humble dude. He dressed plainly and certainly didn't drive a Porsche. It always makes me angry when I see people exploiting others' generosity and faith for financial gain.

Dude, it's 10% of your shit now or eternal damnation. Don't you go to church?

edit: Okay guys, you're not gonna' believe this, but I'm an atheist and I was making a general statement that I found funny. The idea of giving anything to the church is ludicrous to me. I really don't care to be corrected on this. I do not care in the slightest.

It's a recurring theme, starting with Abram "tithing" 10% of his money to Mephibosheth. The idea of supporting church staff can be traced to the meat for offerings in the Old Testament being given to the priests for their sustenance, along with other offerings.

Jesus talks quite a bit about money, and how paying taxes and giving to the poor, as well as supporting church staff, are all part of Christians' duty to "give back" within the larger view that Christians are given their money by God and expected to be responsible with it.

The only people who were commanded to give a tithe (tenth) unto God were the
children of Israel. The law which God gave to Israel through Moses required
Isael to give one-tenth of their goods to God. These verses teach the
tithing regulations God expected the nation of Israel to obey: Lev. 27:30;
Num. 18:21, Deut. 12:6; 14:28 26:12; 2Ch 31:5; Neh. 10:38; 12:44; 13:12; Mal
3:10.

The gospel of Jesus Christ does not command a tithe (10%). Whereas Israel
was to give a tithe, we are taught to "lay by in store as we have been
prospered (1 Cor. 16:2), and as we "purposeth in our heart" (2 Cor. 9:7),
which will "prove the sincerity of our love" (2 Cor. 8:8). Giving which is
void of first giving one's heart to the Lord does not please God (Mk.
12:41-44; 2 Cor. 8:5; 9:6-7).

God will be pleased with the giver who understands that all he possesses
belongs to the Lord. Such an attitude allows him to give generously,
cheerfully and according to his prosperity. Such giving cannot be forced or
demanded as a debt which is due.

Thank you for your good question. Please write again if we can assist you
in your study of God's word.

I posted above about how Jesus discusses the importance of giving back to society, the poor, and yes, the church, as part of our stewardship of what Christians view as our gift of financial income from God.

I'm not religious myself, but I grew up in the church and most of the money I've tithed has gone to charitable organizations. Call them criminals all you want for taking a bit off the top to run the place, but I wouldn't have given money to charity at all if it weren't for the church.

meh,
it's handled like a boss. Definitely pretty funny response, but his original post is not all that funny. Christianity for example, is free. Maybe attending a specific church is not. But most just ask for donations, nothing mandatory.
Not hating on this, just not sure its worthy of the front page.

i was a christian for most of my youth. at the churches i went to (about 10 different ones) there wasn't a single part of it that felt "free". at every turn you were being guilted into contributing with something.

maybe it is free to pick up the bible and believe, but i don't think that's what was being discussed originally.

I hear ya. I grew up in a church as well. I didn't think they pressured any of it's followers. I mean, they passed around the basket, but that was the extent of it all. Another point to be made is that Christianity is free. Maybe a church will guilt you into paying. But you can practice the religion without ever paying a dime for it. Not trying to blow anything out of proportion. Just didn't think the original post was all that original to begin with.

I hear ya. I grew up in a church as well. I didn't think they pressured any of it's followers. I mean, they passed around the basket, but that was the extent of it all.

they pressured at the ones I went to, and I was the son of a poor family. the guilt was terrible and it was the only thing that I can remember about having gone to church all of those years.

Another point to be made is that Christianity is free. Maybe a church will guilt you into paying. But you can practice the religion without ever paying a dime for it.

it costs to own a book. it doesn't cost anything to read a book, though. despite this, I do not consider books to be free. the bible pushes an expectation on you to attend church, although it may not mention it explicitly. with context, it should be no question that the majority of christians are expected to attend some form of church. i'm sure there's churches out there that are self-sufficient through other means (rather than asking attendees for money) and for those you would probably be right, although i've never seen one personally.

You make a solid argument, but like you said reading is free. I consider the practice more like the ability to read. Not read a book, but the reading itself. It's more about the knowledge and practice of that knowledge. And like most knowledge, there are so many different ways to acquire it, you cannot say you were forced to pay, when there are many other means. [Sure, certain privileged knowledge is going to cost you, like the knowledge it takes to become a doctor for example, but I'm sure we can both agree that Christianity cannot be compared with Rocket Science]
But I hear you. I do not agree with the church. The institution of church is what turned me away from Christianity in the first place. I found myself believing in a god, but not the institution of church. Eventually I found myself really not believing in anything, although I personally find the two to be separate cases.

This doesn't make much sense. You don't need to pay money to be an atheist, nor do you need to pay money to be a Christian. To be honest, I agree with the dude pointing out the hypocrisy of charging for a book and simultaneously claiming atheism is free.

Saying that the "best part" of atheism is not donating money to an organized religion is fairly subjective, but I'd suggest the best part of atheism is learning morality from my own life experiences rather than having a book and religious expert dictate it to me.

I think that he might be refering of how the Christianity does need money to exist, and atheism doesn't. Yes, you can be a Christian without giving any money (and I think that acording to their standars you would be a bad Christian, but you would be a Christian), but if no one did give them money Christianity would stop existing.

Except saying that it didn't make much sense. It makes at least somewhat sense. In fact my opinion is that it makes a whole lot of sense. To be truly religious you NEED to give money to the church and god shit. Believe me, my family gives money each week so my mothers crumbling church can be repainted.

You don't need to give money. My parents are really religious but if they don't want to give they don't it really doesn't make them less religious. Giving money is more of a this makes me feel tingly inside type of thing.

I see it in the people I know, more as them getting depressed when they can't fulfil their weekly donations because they wanted to go on a vacation for the first time in 15 years. Fuck everything about religion. Believe in your imaginary friend in the sky like my dad does, but stay the fuck away from the organization known as the church, and stay away from talking about how much god loves you because your his special child, and get back to fucking reality.

I've always thought that the best part of atheism was not having to know shit about God. To be a proper Christian you have to spend years studying the bible and the history surrounding it. You don't have to study a fucking thing to be an atheist. I kind of envy you guys.

Starting from Genesis you need to pay to be a Christian. You know the story of Cain and Able? Yeah, that was about paying to please God as he commanded. Giving a percentage of your income continues on into the new testament. Jesus even commands that you give away all your possessions. So you really can't be a Christian for free. I'm hard pressed to think of a book in the bible that doesn't mention giving first fruits.

It's even easier than that, though. Go to a church on sunday and sit through a service. The plates that they pass around for offering are for your tithes. Different churches look at it different ways, but most of the churches I've been to have put significant pressure on the idea that you should give them money, to the point that people who do give money often look down on those who don't.

Yeah, not everyone tithes, and not all religions collect them. Faith is free, going to a social club on weekends in a nice building is what costs money. If people in this thread want to rage against something, they should rage against the practice of encouraging huge tithes, not religion or faith.

Tithes, at least to Jews, are a minimum expected charity. How can you possibly think that having a religion that strongly suggests a minimum amount of charity is a bad thing?

Indeed the only point of the tithe in general is to support the institution you are using and the good works of the institution. (Historically, and still today, religious institutions are a huge source of charity work) The fact that there is no fee, just a recommended donation, sounds pretty lax.

I actually think atheism is more expensive. Just think about all the nice science books you need and all the education. While as a Christian you only need the bible (quite cheap) and basic religious education (can be acquired in a month probably - hooray no need for school).

Personally, I give to the church because my Grandpa is a minister and I've seen him struggle on about $15,000 a year for like 20 years. I know that he works 24/7 and is a great help in his community. The vast majority of ministers don't get paid much, and the vast majority of churches give quite a bit to their communities.

actually never is there a "threat of eternal damnation" and 100% of funds i donate to my church all goes to CHARITY. mainly the homeless shelters in my area. like it or not but Catholic Charities are one of the most charitable groups in the entire world

You don't have to do shit to believe in something. If I wanted to I could sit at home and choose one day to believe a purple monkey riding a dolphin will carry me to everlasting bliss when I die and I won't need to pay a dime. Same goes for if I were to decide to believe in the bible (which I don't).

I think it's best to consider the bible and the church separate since there are many branches that came off of a particular religion due to multiple interpretations of the bible.

It is possible to be a good scientist and still believe in a god. It seems like many people have created cookie cutter ideas that lock the fact that religious people cannot be scientific. If the calculations and evidence pans out then it shouldn't matter what the author believes. Any legitimate scientist who is reviewing someone's work wouldn't be dismissing evidence because the author has a different lifestyle in one way or another.

But if they allow that lifestyle to influence their work and seek facts to support their lifestyle instead of seeking facts to make unbiased conclusions, they lose credibility. And to say that scientific community shuns religious people why do good science if simply false, it only shuns those who try to force facts to fit their religion and omit all contrary ones.

Religious people may be able to be scientific, but they most oftentimes are not.

Anyone can try to fit facts to what they believe (like politicians). It may or may not be true that religious people do it more, I can't say for sure. The reason I can't say for sure is because that is a generalization and sometimes those are not true. Although that conclusion does make a lot of sense to me.

On the other hand, often the most religious are the most vocal so they often get more spotlight. So it could be like only 5-10% being that way while 90% are not.

The general point I'm trying to get across is that while I agree with the atheist side of things, there are times when I see the same group of people getting full of themselves and do the same damn things that they dislike about the other side. Soo... people should stop being hypocrites.

Nice comment, bad precedent to set though. Anyone who sees that is justified in asking for the book for free now. That's assuming he wrote the book to make money, which if he didn't plan for, his publisher did.

This is blindingly retarded and any published author should be laughed out of business for supporting such foolishness.

Yes, atheism is free, JUST LIKE EVERY THOUGHT, CREED OR IDEOLOGY. What, did you think there was some meter attached to your brain that slowly ticked up every time you thought about God??

Doubtless the writer is referring to the Christian tradition of tithing 10%, which has always been nothing more than tradition, and is rarely strictly observed nowadays. Some churches don't ask for money at all, some point out that if you really follow the Christian faith you give everything you will ever own to God. Some churches are scummy, most are entirely on the level.

But, no, pastors should pay the church electricity bill by working part time. That's the only way Christianity can be as good as "free" atheism.